Claude Opus 5 on Vidman AI

Claude Opus 5 is Anthropic's strongest Opus-tier model: a hybrid reasoning model built for serious coding and AI agents, featuring a 1M-token context window. Anthropic describes it as a thoughtful and proactive model that comes close to the frontier intelligence of Claude Fable 5 at half the price, and as a step-change improvement for the Opus tier: stronger coding, more capable agents and sharper professional work. It is an upgrade to Claude Opus 4.8, with gains in agentic coding, computer use and long-horizon knowledge work, as well as improvements in mathematical and scientific reasoning.

On coding and knowledge-work evaluations such as Frontier-Bench and GDPval-AA, Opus 5 is the state of the art among the models Anthropic compared it against, though it remains behind Claude Mythos 5 on cybersecurity tasks.

Capabilities

• Effort settings: The model's effort level controls how hard it works: it reaches its best performance at higher effort on the highest-value tasks, and runs at much lower cost on tasks that do not need the ceiling of its capabilities.
• Long context: a 1M-token context window.
• Multimodal input: text and image input, with text output.
• Tool use and agents: built for production agentic workflows: orchestrating complex multi-tool tasks, planning deliberately, verifying its own work and sustaining long-running work autonomously.
• Prompt caching and batch processing: Anthropic advertises up to 90% cost savings with prompt caching and 50% with batch processing on its own API.

Benchmark results

Results reported in the Claude Opus 5 system card and Anthropic's launch materials. Unless noted, coding results are averages over five trials in Anthropic's standard system-card configuration.

Benchmark	Claude Opus 5	Reference points
SWE-bench Verified	96.0%	Claude Fable 5: 95.0% · Claude Opus 4.8: 88.6%
SWE-bench Pro	79.2%	Claude Fable 5: 80.0% · Claude Opus 4.8: 69.2%
SWE-bench Multilingual	89.5%	n/a
SWE-bench Multimodal	59.4%	n/a
FrontierCode 1.1 Main	53.4% (medium effort)	Claude Fable 5: 53.5%
FrontierCode 1.1 Extended	63.6%	best verified result
Frontier-Bench v0.1	43.3%	Claude Fable 5: 33.7% · Claude Opus 4.8: 18.7%
ARC-AGI-3	30.2%	Claude Opus 4.8: 1.5%
OSWorld 2.0 (computer use)	70.6%	n/a
CursorBench 3.2	70.0% (max effort)	Claude Fable 5: 70.5%
GDPval-AA v2 (knowledge work)	1861 Elo	over 100 points ahead of Claude Fable 5 in Artificial Analysis' run
AA-Briefcase (agentic knowledge work)	1720 Elo	+146 over Claude Fable 5 in Artificial Analysis' run

Anthropic's launch reporting adds:

• On Frontier-Bench v0.1, Opus 5 more than doubles Opus 4.8's performance at a lower cost per task.
• On ARC-AGI 3, an evaluation of novel problem solving, Opus 5's score is three times as high as the next-best model Anthropic compared against.
• On Zapier AutomationBench, which measures whether models complete business tasks end to end, Opus 5's pass rate is around 1.5× the next-best model for the same cost per task. Even at its lowest effort setting it passes more tasks than any other model in the comparison.
• On OSWorld 2.0, Opus 5 outperforms every other model at any given cost, surpassing Fable 5's best result at just over a third of the cost.
• On Anthropic's internal life-sciences evaluations, Opus 5 improves on Opus 4.8 on every one: most notably organic-chemistry tasks such as inferring molecular structures from spectroscopy data (+10.2 percentage points) and protein-variant function prediction (+7.7 percentage points).

Working with the model

In Anthropic's evaluations and early-access testing, Opus 5 stood out for verifying its own work and iterating until it succeeds:

• On one Frontier-Bench task, given a drawing of a machine part and no way to view it directly, Opus 5 wrote its own computer-vision pipeline to pull the geometry from the raw pixels, then reconstructed the full part as a 3D model: repeatedly. No competing model with the same setup solved it in five attempts.
• Given a real bug in a popular open-source package manager, Opus 5 found the root cause and fixed an edge case the community's patch had missed.
• Anthropic's early-access customers reported the largest gains on harder, longer-horizon work (debugging and root-cause analysis, multi-day enterprise projects, financial modeling, legal agent work and deck/document production) with several reporting equal-or-better quality than Opus 4.8 at meaningfully fewer tokens, turns and wall-clock time.

Safety and evaluations

Anthropic's pre-deployment evaluation of Opus 5 is documented in the Claude Opus 5 System Card. Anthropic reports testing across software engineering, mathematical and scientific reasoning, long context, agentic search and multi-agent orchestration, multimodal and computer-use tasks, real-world professional work and multilingual, healthcare and life-sciences domains, with Opus 5 substantially stronger than Opus 4.8 across the board.

On cybersecurity specifically, Anthropic describes Opus 5 as a general-purpose model not specifically trained for cyber tasks and reports five capability evaluations (ExploitBench, OSS-Fuzz, Firefox 147, CyScenarioBench and ExploitGym) alongside external cyber-range testing by the UK AI Security Institute. Anthropic states that the model's cyber capabilities exceed those of its predecessor but fall short of Claude Mythos 5.